\u03a4\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03b7 24 \u039f\u03ba\u03c4\u03c9\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 2018<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Thank you for inviting me to your congress. Copyrights and their management is of course a cultural issue, but at the same time it is deeply political and historical. In this scope, exploring copyright laws not on their own, but as part of specific discursive contexts may appear helpful in tracing the contingencies of the future. What I am suggesting is that it is impossible to understand the discussion on copyrights and their management through an essentialized approach.\u00a0 We ought to keep in mind that it is inscribed in the matrix of the political, ideological, economic and cultural discourse of historically defined societies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Copyright laws became the main issue in the public discussion several\ntimes in the past, especially when a significant change in the social context\nor the technological means of cultural production took place. We began\ndiscussing about copyrights, when printing transformed the field of production,\nreproduction and circulation of literary works, mainly in the discursive frame\nof the Enlightenment. During the 19th century, when the developments in\ntechnology facilitated literacy and the shaping of the public sphere, the\napproach of copyrights was twofold: to censor the content that was considered\npotentially dangerous for the established political and religious order and to\nencourage publication projects deemed worthy or important. Discussions sparked\nagain in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when cultural products became\ncommodities of mass consumption. At the same time, digitization began to pose\nquestions of authorship and ownership. The field was then much broader than\nbefore: texts, images, moving images, art, music etc became pieces of a puzzle\nthat at the same time defined cultural production and were defined by their\nconsumption, often through reproductions and replicas. It is the period that\nWalter Benjamin refers to as the one in which the aura of authenticity had been\nlost due to the mechanical reproduction of cultural products but the loss was\nbalanced by the widening of their accessibility. Cultural products left the\nivory towers of the elites and found their place in the centre of everyday\npractices. It is within this socio-political context that the main lines of\ncontemporary legislation on copyrights were formed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Today we are facing new challenges. Cultural products require not only\ntheir reproduction, but often their alteration to remain interesting. They are\nconstantly \u201cworks in progress\u201d. Limits and distinctions are becoming porous or\nblurred. New authorships are linked to the initial one, authenticity is\ncompromised, cultural products acquire second and third lives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
We are facing a major shift of paradigm, witnessing and preparing at the\nsame time a new matrix for cultural services. In the process, it is imperative\nto regulate the field and to secure the sustainability of cultural production\nby establishing a framework of copyrights on behalf of the creators. The\nconduct is political. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is the state\u2019s duty to shape the frame within which collective\nmanagement organizations, right-holders and consumers will function. We are\naligned with the recent European Union law initiatives to update the\nlegislation on copyrights and protect the creators\u2019 interests. Phenomena where\nmediating networks ignore the interests of the creators in the name of the supposed\nfreedom of consumption, practically undermine the process of cultural\nproduction as a whole. Such practices are not as rare as we would like to\nthink. In Greece, for instance, the monopoly of the field of copyright\nmanagement for years resulted in the distortion of the market, to a point that\nthe government was forced to adopt an intermediate and transitional solution,\nuntil the field of the collective copyrights management could be\nreconstructed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Regulation of such a complex field needs to be planned both on a global\nand a national level. IFRRO effectively gives the global directions as far as\nthe position of its members\/right holders are concerned. Peculiarities on\nnational levels need to be dealt with by national institutions. In the case of our\ncountry, the situation has shaped as follows; the Directive 2014\/26 for the\ncollective management has been implemented so as to provide: extensive\nregulation securing transparency, accountability, supervision and participation\nof right-holders in the governance of CMOs. Equipment levies have been\nmodernized, so as to include digital technology and make the compensation\nfairer. At the same time, an exception to the public lending right with\nremuneration for right-holders has been introduced. It is a step towards\ndemocratization of the accessibility, provided that libraries play an active\nrole in the society. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The next initiative to be undertaken is the new Directive for the\nCopyright in the Digital Single Market, so as to modernize certain aspects of\nthe copyright framework. The Greek government aims to support the new press\npublishers\u2019 right, in their electronic publications, to fair compensation, and\nto regulate the liability of platforms that are profiting from content uploaded\nby end-users. The aim is that licenses established between platform and right-holders\nshall provide for a fair remuneration of the right-holders. This leads to an\nimprovement of the position of authors against those who are exploiting their\nworks, the creation of a level playing field between the educational sector and\nthe right-holders. Further, the incorporation of the Directive 2017\/1564 for\nthe benefit of print disabled persons, and the improvement and enhancement of\nthe Greek Copyright Office, with the scope to become an effective supervisory\nauthority on CMOs and a mediator between CMOs and users. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
To sum up. Copyrights laws and management are closely relevant to the\nkind of citizens we need. Who can produce and access culture? How is culture\nconnected to power? How does technology redefine the conception, the function\nand the management of culture? What are the balances between accessibility,\nsustainability, profit, public and social benefit? <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Users will always want to have access to copyright works in a simple and\nfast way without barriers. Authors, artists, producers and publishers depend on\ntheir income from their copyrights in order to create more cultural, scientific\nand educational works. Copyright should not be seen as a barrier to free\naccess. Collective management organizations have an important role in the\nperspective of facilitating and providing legal access to copyright works, thus\ncontributing and safeguarding cultural sustainability.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u03a4\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03b7 24 \u039f\u03ba\u03c4\u03c9\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 2018 Thank you for inviting me to your congress. Copyrights and their management is of course a cultural issue, but at the same time it is deeply political and historical. In this scope, exploring copyright laws not … Continue reading